...after 1 hour, he said he prefer his old B&W 603's sound
The Axiom is too "bright" for him....and he's aiming for another B&W now....

To each their own.

You win some, you lose some.

I thought that my friend’s B&W 703s sounded a little better, not as “forward” or “revealing” which I preferred, at least at the time, as my M80s but not nearly enough better to justify the price.

I should take my M80s back over to his place or better have him bring his B&Ws over here and compare them again now that I’ve gotten more accustomed to the “Axiom sound” and have more quality recordings which take advantage of it.

There is certainly nothing wrong with the 603's, if that is what he likes, so be it. At least he was honest.

mpyw;

That is interesting, because when doing the blind test at Axiom, I found the B&W's brighter than the M3's. Granted M3's arn't 80's.

... and the 603 floorstander is not the same model as the B&W bookshelf that was used in the blind testing either...

True, I believe those B&w bookshelfs at the Axiom blind test were from higher in B&W's lineup than the 603's. Anyway, as others have stated, if your friend prefers them it's entirely his choice.

Hi Adrian and all,

Yep, the B&W 805 was a Nautilus model, the high-end line from B&W, which at the time it was introduced was $2000/pair. B&W now has a "diamond" 805, priced at an absurd $5000 a pair, which looks much like the Nautilus 805.

The B&W 600 series are the lower-priced line from B&W and, like Polk models, I've found them to be quite inconsistent in sound quality from one model to the next, or from one line to the next line. This inconsistency is not uncommon in brands that offer various lines of loudspeakers.

The other factor that you have to allow for is the tendency of owners of specific speaker models who come to accommodate the "sound" of their speakers as their reference, warts and all, and come to hear anything that's more neutral and accurate as a kind of shockingly new and different sound that they won't like unless they participate in a blind test and don't know what they are listening to.

Over the years I've spoken to some audiophiles who have been using what I view as mediocre old speakers for decades and who simply don't want change or are unwilling to acknowledge that just maybe their old speakers aren't very good. It's an all-too-human tendency.

Regards,
Alan

Have you listened to the Revel Ultima Salon2 Alan? I think the M80's and the Salon2 would be the ultimate of blind listening tests. They seem to have similar design goals.

I was watching the Iron Man 2 extra features and the recording for the music soundtrack was done at Abbey Road Studio. I noticed they use B&W speakers as reference. The one room had multiple speakers I think in some sort of MTM design placed horizontally across a wall (on-wall). Do you know the purpose for that? Seems like a rather strange arrangement.

Whether or not someone thinks that a speaker company of B&Ws history and stature is important and how they conduct their business, it is interesting to note that not too many months ago, in a "Audioholics" review of one of their most recently introduced product lines, that other than the "top-of-the-line" Diamond 800 series, B&W is now manufacturing ALL their other models in China. Despite that, I haven't seen the price drop too much on their speakers.

Endorsing Worfzara's comment, I also found the B&W's (in the blind listening test) to be a little bright, a little leaner sounding. The M3's were fuller and more balanced, IMO.

Hi Dr. House,

Yes, I've heard the Revel Ultima in a demo at the Consumer Electronics Show, but never in the same room as the M80. When I heard the Revel, it was very neutral, wide-range and natural, much like the Axiom M80, and I'd wager that in a double-blind comparison, the two would receive almost identical scores and the "similarly good" ranking.

The Revel loudspeakers are generally very fine, and given Kevin Voecks's years spent in Canada (designing for Mirage)and his familiarity with the NRC program and the "family of curves" anechoic measurements, that's no surprise. The speakers he designed for Snell were among the best-sounding US speakers at the time.

As to the B&W at Abbey Road, that's expected, as B&W is a British speaker company and perhaps the most prestigious, highly marketed and expensive. I knew the late John Bowers (the "B" of B&W) and certainly the top-of-the line 801 and its various iterations were very good speakers and did fairly well in double-blind comparisons when I was a magazine editor, but not as well as several Canadian brands including Axiom, Energy Veritas, Paradigm and PSB.

I don't know what to make of the speaker configuration you describe seeing in the video.

Cheers,
Alan

Thanks for your thoughts Alan. I'd have to look at the Blu-ray disk again more closely but it looks very similar to this configuration. From reading the description on the website, I take it they are used as the surround monitors?

http://www.abbeyroad.com/studios/studio1/control-room/

Click on the control room.

Looks like they're center channel speakers used for surrounds. Probably aesthetic reasons.

Yes, I agree, and it almost seeems like they may flip up or go into the ceiling out of the way when they're not used.

Alan

The funny thing about that special feature on the disk is we find out Tom Morello from the band Rage Against The Machine/Audioslave has problems with the 7/8th time signature and odd time signatures in general. He had a tough time recording one guitar part in particular. I was kind of surprised about that.

Almost like finding out Einstein couldn't tie his own shoes.

If it was someone like Vai instead than it would hurt.